In post 517, The Dark Wanderer wrote:@northsidegal I have heard that your favorite month is december. I would be interested in finishing this game before that month and you showing up to thread and helping to conclude this game would help with that.
why is this townie to you?
In post 574, skitter30 wrote:
i mean when i read it i thought it was nai, maybe a little buddying-y but he'd been townreading you the whole time so it felt kinda in-line with how he'd been approaching you the whole game
skitter, why did you ask me this question and say this? you already had TDW in your coalition, so i don't understand the mindset behind these posts - and if you just wanted to hear my reasoning for the post being towny, why?
In post 517, The Dark Wanderer wrote:@northsidegal I have heard that your favorite month is december. I would be interested in finishing this game before that month and you showing up to thread and helping to conclude this game would help with that.
why is this townie to you?
In post 574, skitter30 wrote:
i mean when i read it i thought it was nai, maybe a little buddying-y but he'd been townreading you the whole time so it felt kinda in-line with how he'd been approaching you the whole game
skitter, why did you ask me this question and say this? you already had TDW in your coalition, so i don't understand the mindset behind these posts - and if you just wanted to hear my reasoning for the post being towny, why?
cuz i was reading it as nai and you mentioned townreading it two or three seperate times in a short period of time so i could tell you felt strongly about it and so i was wondering what you were getting out of a post i read as nai
Yeah I think I agree. I had a bit of a spat with N_M in my last game with him so I didn't want to come at him out of the gate, but I feel like in my last game he was shitposting and making jokey reads and coming up with nicknames, whereas here he's just done a wolfy pop-in and then popped out.
I don't know that "total disengagement" is reliably scum-indicative but I don't think I right now have a better candidate for scum than N_M.
VOTE: Not_Mafia
Thread seems to be stalling again and my 'WIM' has kinda dropped honestly.
the game would be radically different if day 1 ended upon the coalition vote and i'm pretty sure schadd hasn't changed it like that - as far as i remember the only change he made was that lynches can't be hammered before a coalition is met
yeah i'm pretty sure the day doesn't end but i'm just checking; there was some confusion over it last time and the coalition won the game anyways so the rest of the day didn't play out
just to make sure:
we vote on the coalition first, and if it fails we can vote on a lynch later, right?
(ie selecting a coalition doesn't end the day?)
yup! specifically, the rule is that a majority lynch cannot be achieved before a coalition majority. in the event that a majority of votes existed for a lynch, and then a failed coalition majority occurred, the lynch majority person would immediately explode in a fireball.
mnemonic for you: Toni Morrison Made Comprehensive Dialogues Despite Nearby Hordes of Reactionaries that are Verily Contemptible
Rather than exploding into a fireball, may I suggest the insertion of deadly toxins into the chosen lynch candidate?
According to my sources, this is a substantially more controlled and effective way to cause the cessation of a human life. ^_^
Though I have not studied this at length of course.
